Democrats

We couldn't agree more with Santorum on one thing

How anyone could make the case that they are the best to lead on jobs with a record that lousy—47th out of all 50 states—is as baffling to us as it is to Santorum.

Mitt Romney will meet with Sen. Rick Santorum today in Pittsburgh before a campaign stop at a manufacturing company, where Romney will attempt to present himself as some kind of economic wunderkind. However, Santorum knows better than most that Romney's brand of economics would be a disaster for our country and our economy.

It was only weeks ago that Santorum hammered Romney for his failed record as Massachusetts governor, saying, "If Mitt Romney's an economic heavyweight, we're in trouble, because he was 47th out of 50 in job creation in the state of Massachusetts when he was governor." He added that Romney "didn't do anything in Massachusetts to create an environment for jobs."

Good points. How anyone could make the case that they are the best to lead on jobs with a record that lousy—47th out of all 50 states—is as baffling to us as it is to Santorum. For a man who touts his ability to create jobs as one of his only strengths, Romney's resume for job creation, as evidenced by his record in Massachusetts, is abysmal.

In fact, Romney failed in nearly all areas related to the economy and jobs: Under Romney, Massachusetts increased its debt, expanded government, lost manufacturing jobs at a rate twice the national average, wages fell, and income declined. And there's nothing in Romney's policies—from the $5 trillion in tax cuts weighted toward the wealthy at the expense of investments in the middle class and long-term growth to a corporate tax plan that creates incentives for companies to shift jobs and profits overseas—that suggests he would do any better as president.

Like us, Santorum and his campaign have demonstrated that Romney's No. 1 talking point about why he should be president—25 years of business experience—collapses under closer inspection. Santorum questioned whether Americans are looking for someone who had spent his entire private-sector career "on Wall Street" to be their next president.

Of course, the real issue over Romney's time in the private sector is this: What it actually was and what Romney says it was in order to get elected president are two entirely different things. Romney wants people to believe that he was trying to create jobs in the private sector. In fact, he was trying to create wealth for himself, his partners, and investors—often by loading companies with debt, laying off employees, and stripping them of their pensions and benefits, all while paying himself and his firm handsome fees and profiting from the companies' liquidation. Plundering companies for profit is not exactly a resume builder for someone running for president, as Santorum and his campaign alluded to.

We've noted that Romney not only pays a lower effective tax rate on his income than most middle-class Americans, but he also opposes the Buffett Rule that would require people like him to pay their fair share so we can invest in the things we need to grow our economy and strengthen the middle class. And Santorum, like most Americans, doesn't think much of Romney getting to pay such a low tax rate, saying, "Rich people can move their money other places. … My tax rate was about 27, 28 percent. Gov. Romney's was half that amount."

Finally, Romney gave John McCain 23 years of tax returns when he wanted to be his running mate. His own dad released 12 years of returns when he ran for president. President Obama has released a decade's worth, and Santorum even released four years' worth of returns himself. To date, Romney has only released one year of his tax returns and claims he¹ll release this year's returns when they are ready. It raises the question: What does Mitt Romney have to hide? When he was campaigning for president, Santorum had the same question.

So, to summarize: Santorum thinks, based on Romney's failed jobs and economic record in Massachusetts, that America would be in trouble with him at the helm; that his time as a corporate raider is definitely not what Americans are looking for in a president; that it's unfair that Romney pays a lower tax rate than many middle-class Americans; and that Romney should release his tax returns.

Senator, we couldn't agree more. All this ought to make for an interesting meeting.